John Cowan 2008-10-02 21.31:
Leif Halvard Silli scripsit:For instance, the current registration of "1996" does not specify that it is a "de-DE" related norm. As if "de-CH-1996" would also be correct.It would be. The 1996 reforms were adopted for de-DE, de-AT, de-LI, and in modified form (no �) for de-CH.
Sorry. You are right.Part of the issue is that Switzerland never used the double s ligature, and thus had no problem with that part of the reform. And this is also why I thought it was only a reform of German in Germany.
-- leif halvard silli _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.